A little history I didn't know about.

[Fletcher]

.. it was described in the "Gazetteer" but the picture is from another publication. They don't say what publication. The SBs have two sections inboard and one larger one out board, of the pivot point.

I think, if I understand it right, this would give a theoretical mechanical advantage of 2 to 1, for drawing the weights back into the center----------------------------Sam

Thanks for the clarification Sam .. I'll have to take a closer look when I get the chance. What I am not able to determine is whether the green 'sling' ropes are in the 1749 pic, like I highlighted in the 1751 pic ? They don't appear to be there. They have to come into the calculation too, to work out the leverage effect (MA x SR) for the 1751 version.

ETA : something was bugging me, so I checked - the rope pattern is reversed between the 51er and 49er. And no sling rope to the SB. That's a worry for the basic configuration being a possible runner, imo !

It may be a moot point ateotd - if I could sim the whole shebang then the sim would just work it out (agh .. the beauty of sims). But I think it's too complex for my old girl with that many parts. Maybe Flash Harry above can have a go ;7)

However, I'm pretty sure I can sim a much much MUCH simpler version, that will do the job. Outta time today.

As my old Zen Master always used to say .. simplify, simplify, SIMPLIFY ! LOL

[Fletcher]

Found a spare hour or two today. Here is my simplified sim of the 1751 Gentleman's Magazine Self_Moving Wheel. It was too complex as it was, and too laborious, to construct accurately, for my program to handle all components reliably. I reduced down from 13 weights to 12 to increase placement accuracy etc i.e at 12 x 30 degree intervals and not 13 x 27.6923 degrees each.

So .. I made the executive decision to simplify down to basics. The sim accuracy is at an expedient 100fps, with Air Frictions on High to dampen down oscillations to stop it quickly (also for expediency as it makes no difference to the end result).

I include two screen grabs of the sim as attachments to this post for those without the program. The first is at the sim start 0 frames with the purple roller-weight moved horizontally to an outer radius in contact with a fixed curved ramp. This gives maximum torque conditions at start. Note the position of the System COM/COG icon near the axle. And see its coordinates summary for the weights as an output I created in Red. Note the x and y deviation at the start of the run cycle (x 0.211m & y -0.167m). The background wheel (circle 1) starts out at 0 degrees rotation.

The second pic attachment shows the sim halted at 1200 frames, when things have come to near absolute stop. Note the System COM/COG x and y summary coordinates again (x 0.165m & y -0.187m). It lost some GPE as it moved down and to the left ! And importantly that the background wheel only managed to rotate CW 9.6 degrees, when the 12 weight wheel has 30 degree arc sectors. IOW's, there is insufficient torque to complete a 30 degree pass and fulfill the lifts that would be required to reset etc. For those wishing to dig a little deeper they might consider vector analysis. The earlier 1749 CCW proposal would also suffer the same fate, imo.

N.B. IMO it is entirely legitimate to replace the lift tension ropes and SB's of the original proposal with a simplified physical contact fixed and curved Ramp. This is akin to MT12 and MT23 and their 'blue collar' physical contact method of lifting. Noting that other MT's like MT15 (and others) attempt to use a 'white collar' 'pull or push/manipulation' method more similar to the Gents Magazine proposal.

IMO, ultimately, lift methods are interchangeable, and all fail to reset for the same reasons, regardless of lifting method employed - sorry to say !
..

[Tarsier79]

I both agree and disagree. The ramp specifically uses wheel rotation directly to lift the weight. The vast majority use rotation either directly or indirectly to power the lift.

On the gentleman's wheel, how do the ropes actually lift the weights gradually after 3? Perhaps there is a way to use rotation as a trigger, not a power source.(I do not know how to achieve this magical mechanism.)

[WaltzCee]

I still drive my trusty old car too Walt ;7) Call me old fashioned .. but if it ain't broke ...

I wouldn't want to disparage your wench publicly, Fletcher, but if you were at Talladega it might be prudent to let her idle in the pits and get behind the wheel of something with an acceleration that can mechanically separate your marrow from your bones.

On the gentleman's wheel, how do the ropes actually lift the weights gradually after 3? Perhaps there is a way to use rotation as a trigger, not a power source.(I do not know how to achieve this magical mechanism.)

I think Fletcher's SIM and my initial sys CoM view are looking at the trigger of an OB.

[Fletcher]

I both agree and disagree. The ramp specifically uses wheel rotation directly to lift the weight. The vast majority use rotation either directly or indirectly to power the lift.

Bob each way ;7) Yes, the vast majority of concepts use torque from overbalance i.e. rotation, either directly in the case of a physical ramp like this simplified sim, or indirectly to facilitate a lift like the London Gent's Wheel imaginative use of rope pulls and SB's etc.

On the gentleman's wheel, how do the ropes actually lift the weights gradually after 3? Perhaps there is a way to use rotation as a trigger, not a power source.(I do not know how to achieve this magical mechanism.)

That's a very good question, of a technical nature lol. My experience with real world builds and sims is that weights tend to take the path of least resistance (like water). By that I mean how can a Driver weight deploy fully outwards near 3 o'cl on a shallow trajectory (losing little GPE), while at the same time thru it's connections to others lift the more vertical orientated forward Load weights progressively closer to the inner radius thus gaining greater GPE than lost by that Driver ? Vertical physically overrides Horizontal. This is a direct factor of ability to lose GPE. The weight able to lose more GPE than gained by another is 'Applied Leverage In Action', imo. It's non-negotiable Law of Levers.

And why I raised a few posts back the discrepancy of the rope patterns between the CCW 49ner and the CW 51er. To me they both look like non-coincidental conceptual ideas of an idealized situation to achieve sustained self-movement, using weights, SB's and ropes and pulleys.

Given that these appeared as published engravings soon after B's. death, and bare some resemblance to Wolff's comments about expandable arms etc, then I think Oystein's hypothesis is astute and right on the money. Or at least high probability of being so.

viewtopic.php?p=183458#p183458

That some men, perhaps inner circle, got together and attempted to decipher B's. published books, combined with their societal learning, and come up with what they thought might be his mechanics. However, this concept and others of a similar ilk have been around for centuries, so I think it was unsuccessful, else we'd have them on every street corner and in every home 3 centuries later. And if in private use (tilt of the hat to conspiracy theorists) they'd be expunged from the historical record. So we can safely assume imo that these can not and do not work as intended, and are not potential runners in this configuration. The ol' Good Try, But No Cigar !

I would agree that logic dictates the act of rotation must be at least a trigger to some other actions, in the final analysis. Else we could do away with a rotating wheel environment and just have a reciprocating environment, like a see-saw analogy.

[silent]

This is worth having a look at - an old animation that Michigan Jim posted done by Marcello E. - this is the movement of weights in the Bessler wheel. My opinion yes, but more facts involved in this opinion than anyone realizes.

Again I stress that studying the writings of 'circle' on overunity.com is a huge help towards working toward the solution. Whoever he is, the guy is a genius and although he didn't reveal the solution, I'm fully convinced 100% that he was not spouting lies. The solution is absolutely beautiful and all the clues of Bessler fit so well.

silent

[Fletcher]

Hi silent .. if you were to connect a rod between the masses so that they were physically held apart then you might see a similarity to this veproject1 fake but educational wheel on You Tube - the overbalanced cross - just move the ramp in closer to the axle and the weights would follow a very similar path to jim_mich's conceptual design and ME's animation, gaining more GPE and subsequently having extended torque range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmjBTSdCiVg

[Fletcher]

I still drive my trusty old car too Walt ;7) Call me old fashioned .. but if it ain't broke ...

I wouldn't want to disparage your wench publicly, Fletcher, but if you were at Talladega it might be prudent to let her idle in the pits and get behind the wheel of something with an acceleration that can mechanically separate your marrow from your bones.

Niiiice .. but as my dear old dad always said (well, he never, I just made it up) .. it ain't the junk under the hood, but where the rubber meets the road that counts. More horsepower would just cause the tyres to spin and shred ;7)

You may find this surprising. WM2D is a tool I use. It's a valuable tool no less. I wouldn't be without it. But it doesn't replace hard mahi and creative process. It's absolutely wonderful for putting together concepts for designs, for testing and understanding mechanical principles super quickly. I try to anticipate how something will act before I press the run sim. Then I compare to what I thought would happen. And update the logic box and hopefully retrain and retain what I learned that day if two different things.

But always in my mind is that B. didn't have a sim program; he did the mahi, and he built scores of real world builds (that I don't have the time for, or need to do I think). His solution was stupid simple (paraphrased from easy to understand and simple (relatively) to build). That means my sim program could probably handle it if I had the right mechanical approach. At least the bare bones concept testing. I believe that the final solution will be able to be expressed in terms of Newton's Laws (and therefore work in my sim, probably), but will violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. Fortunately my sim doesn't care about heat.

And if B. didn't need a super-charged sim program, then neither do we ! It's a nice to have, not essential to have !

Old fashioned again lol.

[silent]

I can appreciate your sentiments Fletcher, but the way people go about making these weights move is the entire key. Bessler figured out to do it in a way that is genius. There is a way to make them move exactly like this without resorting to fake methods. Once people see it, they will say, "Oh now I understand!" Bessler for sure didn't want people to easily figure it out, but there is a geometric configuration that allows the weights to move like this. Once you figure out the arrangement, then get the springs and triggers figured out, then stack the mechanisms, it'll run. You draw a line through it and it leaves .20 to .25 of the weights hanging out in the air and that is the motion that powers the machine. There is a lot going on it, but breaking it down 2 weights at a time, it becomes manageable. Let's just say I will remember who treated me well on the forum. I just hope John Collins lives long enough so that I can build this and have the pleasure of showing it to him. His work paved the way for me to get to this point. I know I'm just another voice claiming to have the solution, but when you see it, it speaks truth and leaves nothing to conjecture. It's the darned triggers and springs that have me scratching my head since you always have to keep everything balanced, but I have a method that I think will work. All that remains now is get my brother to start drawing up the parts so that I can get them cut on a CNC laser.

silent

[Fletcher]

Onya silent .. best of luck ! Promise your brother some beers - usually helps.

Sincerely .. all the best. It's hard to come up with good ideas worth an actual build these days. Myself, once out of lockdown intend to build another mock-up model I've had on my mind for some time. The planning and building process is cathartic once I get a few measure and cuts under my belt.

[WaltzCee]

You may find this surprising. WM2D is a tool I use.

Not surprising at all. I was surprised when I was doing things you couldn't do. It is a powerful tool.

I believe that the final solution will be able to be expressed in terms of Newton's Laws (and therefore work in my sim, probably), but will violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. Fortunately my sim doesn't care about heat.

Using my legitimate student license for wm2d what I learned is N3 has some exceptions. Consequently a gradient can be created.

Archimedes might be a little surprised too.

Let's just say I will remember who treated me well on the forum.

??

[WaltzCee]

. . .
Let's just say I will remember who treated me well on the forum.

??

I thought this was an interesting statement and worth looking at as we spin our wheels looking for a solution. The entire quote is very enlightening.

I can appreciate your sentiments Fletcher, but the way people go about making these weights move is the entire key. Bessler figured out to do it in a way that is genius. There is a way to make them move exactly like this without resorting to fake methods. Once people see it, they will say, "Oh now I understand!" Bessler for sure didn't want people to easily figure it out, but there is a geometric configuration that allows the weights to move like this. Once you figure out the arrangement, then get the springs and triggers figured out, then stack the mechanisms, it'll run. You draw a line through it and it leaves .20 to .25 of the weights hanging out in the air and that is the motion that powers the machine. There is a lot going on it, but breaking it down 2 weights at a time, it becomes manageable. Let's just say I will remember who treated me well on the forum. I just hope John Collins lives long enough so that I can build this and have the pleasure of showing it to him. His work paved the way for me to get to this point. I know I'm just another voice claiming to have the solution, but when you see it, it speaks truth and leaves nothing to conjecture. It's the darned triggers and springs that have me scratching my head since you always have to keep everything balanced, but I have a method that I think will work. All that remains now is get my brother to start drawing up the parts so that I can get them cut on a CNC laser.

silent

and . . .

This is worth having a look at - an old animation that Michigan Jim posted done by Marcello E. - this is the movement of weights in the Bessler wheel. My opinion yes, but more facts involved in this opinion than anyone realizes.
download/file.php?id=22652

Again I stress that studying the writings of 'circle' on overunity.com is a huge help towards working toward the solution. Whoever he is, the guy is a genius and although he didn't reveal the solution, I'm fully convinced 100% that he was not spouting lies. The solution is absolutely beautiful and all the clues of Bessler fit so well.

silent

If any could post a link where this poster was treated any way but fair I'd greatly appreciate it.

All I recall is the OP beratting Marchello for stating an opinion then putting him on ignore for not changing his opinion. And now we see him using Marchello's work.

It appears to me to be a full blown case of PMS (Perpetual Motion Syndrome).

• When a mobilist arrives at the solution to perpetual motion they get very puffed up and want to segregate people into 2 different camps.
  
  • Those that have done a fine job at kissing their butt &
    Those whose turn it is to kiss their butt.

How can one recover from this mental illness? Historically what happens is they offer up excuses (needs to be bigger, more weight, more mechanisms, etc. The list is never ending) then finally arrive at a dinner of cold crow.

If all you really want to do is charge your cell phone you fat and happy one, get you a solar panel. It appears you have your sights set well beyond that goal.

I recommend you collect some fire wood so when time comes for you to eat crow, you can warm it up.

Or crow sushi?

[Fletcher]

You may find this surprising. WM2D is a tool I use.

Not surprising at all. I was surprised when I was doing things you couldn't do. It is a powerful tool.

I believe that the final solution will be able to be expressed in terms of Newton's Laws (and therefore work in my sim, probably), but will violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. Fortunately my sim doesn't care about heat.

Using my legitimate student license for wm2d what I learned is N3 has some exceptions. Consequently a gradient can be created.

Archimedes might be a little surprised too.

Hi Walt .. my experience over the years is that my old program appears to not be forward compatible (i.e. compatible with newer versions). So every year it gets more and more obsolete, if I want to swap files with someone else etc. However the newer programs like yours appear to be backward compatible. So you can down load mine and I have to rebuild yours ;7)

I think both our programs are probably capable of showing an N3 exception/break. And therefore a pathway or gradient of potential to theoretically exploit to show system momentum gain from a 'natural process' of linear cause and effect. I know you are experienced enough not to be sidetracked by simulation accuracy/iteration settings being insufficient for scale and speed of objects, or overlap errors etc. Tho they can still get the heart fluttering on occasion until we look a little closer. If it stands up to close scrutiny and the aberration is still there, well ???

Assuming a true mechanical N3 exception can be found (I believe this logically explains B's. success, assuming he is the real deal (which I do)) then Archimedes would be as much in the dark as we have been, imo. So he probably would be a little surprised. Especially if it actually worked with his Law of Levers, and not against them.

FWIW .. I also expect programs like Phun (superseded by Algodoo) to also be able to show a positive trend or result to get excited about.

Usual caveats apply !

P.S. trying to not inadvertently marginalize anyone who doesn't have a sim program, tho imo it would be a good thing for them.

[Georg Künstler]

there is no N3 violation, all is covered from physic.
Different acceleration leads to different energy.
Only a matter of time.
Nearly zero time to act will cause a high acceleration and therefore a release of a lot of energy.
Remember Bessler's words, up in a flash.
I have described this type of movement already, it is called "an indirect impact".
The action is not be taken against the moving mass.

The function itself you can see in a

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surge_tank

It is a redirection of forces against gravity, a upwards movement in a flash.

[WaltzCee]

there is no N3 violation, all is covered from physic.
Different acceleration leads to different energy.
Only a matter of time.
Nearly zero time to act will cause a high acceleration and therefore a release of a lot of energy.
Remember Bessler's words, up in a flash.
I have described this type of movement already, it is called "an indirect impact".
The action is not be taken against the moving mass.

The function itself you can see in a

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surge_tank

It is a redirection of forces against gravity, a upwards movement in a flash.

I forgot about all that Georg.

But if that resonant thing is the answer why hasn't it produced a solution?

If I might I'd like to to say that although I can demonstrate with wm2d that an action can have an infinite number of reactions,

I haven't managed a working model.
The 1 meter radius SIM I'm looking at now falls short 3.359mm.

As you say, it's a matter of time.

Speaking of time when are you and that carpenter boy going to get out there in your barn and, well I don't know what you and that boy do out in your barn.